DRAFT v2

Project: Using collaborative open science tools to improve engagement with the ecology of the Guana River Estuary
Project team: Geraldine Klarenberg, Kristie Perez, Nikki Dix, Nia Morales, and Shirley Baker

The University of Florida and Guana Tolomato Matanzas National Estuarine Research Reserve (GTMNERR) are partnering with the local community and broader science community to develop a web-based, public-facing, interactive dashboard to provide access to Guana Estuary datasets. The aim of this work is to support open science and to increase diverse engagement with the Guana Estuary within the GTMNERR by making the data available interactively, using visualization tools.

To this end, the project team sought feedback from those who have been involved with the Guana Estuary to help them to better understand their needs. This document summarizes the results of an online survey that was made available via email, social media, and QR code.

1. Response rate

We received responses from 51 individuals. Out of these, 14 surveys were unfinished. For this report, we also took the unfinished surveys into account.

47 respondents filled in the survey based on a link received via email, 3 via social media, 0 via the QR code available at the GTMNERR Welcome Center, and 1 via the QR code available at the kiosk at the dam.

2. Introductory questions

The survey started with asking respondents about their connection to the Guana Estuary, how often they engage with the Guana Estuary, what data they would be interested in, and whether or not they ever accessed data associated with the Guana Estuary.

For the purposes of this project, and this survey, “Guana Estuary” refers to the Guana Lake and Guana River: the area north and south of the Guana Dam, from Micklers Road to the Tolomato River / intracoastal.

2.1 Guana Estuary connection

We asked respondents about their connection with the Guana Estuary. The figure below summarizes the responses, but note that people could pick more than 1 option. This is why the sum of all percentages adds up to more than 100%.

In total there were 111 connections chosen. E.g. a little over 60% of respondents do recreational activities at the Guana Estuary, and almost 50% collect data or use data for scientific purposes - and these choices are not mutually exclusive! Someone could collect data and also enjoy the Guana Estuary recreationally. Or volunteer and also use the Guana Estuary for educational purposes.

Under “Other”, respondents answered:

  • Lake management - FWC
  • Health
  • GTM-NERR MAG member
  • Sometimes bring international visitors for professional conversations (am retired now).

2.2 Level of engagement

2.3 Data of interest (in general)

We asked respondents what Guana Estuary data they would be interested in, regardless of whether or not they currently have access to these data. Respondents were also asked to rank these datasets, with 1 being the data they are most interested in. They could pick as many or few as they wanted.

The figure below shows the percentage of respondents that picked a particular dataset being of interest to them. E.g. over 80% of respondents picked water quality data. The colors indicate how they ranked it: for instance, almost 40% of all respondents ranked water quality data as their number 1 dataset of interest.

Under “Other”, the 4 types of datasets mentioned were: historical maps, water fowl, dam operations, natural resource management practices/techniques/results.

2.4 Previous experience with accessing data associated with Guana Estuary

The survey asked respondents whether they had accessed data before, and by “data”, we meant “information, especially facts or numbers, collected to be examined and considered and used to help decision-making; or information in an electronic form that can be stored and used by a computer” for instance spreadsheets, databases, graphs, and maps.”

Based on their response whether or not they had accessed data, respondents answered different sets of questions. The results are summarized in the next two sections.

Take home message

  • The majority of respondents use the Guana Estuary recreationally (62.7%) and almost half (49%) collect or use data for scientific purposes. In third and fourth place are other work-related and educational connections (resp. 33.3% and 29.4%).
  • Engagement with the Guana Estuary is mostly once a month (21.6% of respondents), with a tie (19.6%) for once a week and once every 6 months. Daily engagement was indicated by 17.6% of respondents.
  • The top 4 datasets of interest, chosen by more than 60% of the respondents, are: water quality information, information on shellfish, fish and other aquatic organisms, water level information, and information on vegetation.
  • The majority of respondents (83.7%) has accessed data before.

3. Feedback from respondents that had not accessed data before

For respondents that had not (yet) accessed data (N = 8), the figure below summarizes their answers from section 2.3 (datasets of interest). In this figure, the datasets are ordered according to their average ranking, once again 1 being the dataset of most interest.

This paints an interesting picture, as, for instance, water quality data were picked by most respondents, but in terms of average ranking it comes in 4th (3rd) place. Only one person responded they were not interested in any data (“None”), hence this item ranks first, as the average of 1 is 1… We can essentially disregard this item. The 3 datasets that score less than an average ranking of 3 are water level information, reserve or trail closures, and water quality information. However, information on vegetation, and information on fish, shellfish and other aquatic organisms was also picked by more than 60% (5 respondents) - but it was ranked lower on average.

These responses will still be linked to the answers in 2.3

The survey asked these respondents broad questions on how often they would access these data, and what they would use them for.

This figure shows that 25% (2 respondents) were not interested in accessing data, and that about half of the respondents would either access data either once a month or once a year (25% each).

In terms of what people would use data for, the majority would use it for (non-research / non-educational) work-related purposes and decision making, as per the figure below. Also here, respondents could pick more than one answer, so the sum of all percentages is more than 100%.

Under “Other”, respondents listed:

Take home message

  • For the (8) respondents that had not accessed data before, their main interest would be in data on water level information, reserve or trail closures, and water quality information.
  • If they could access data, 25% of respondents would access data once a month and 25% once a year.
  • 25% of respondents (2 people) are not interested in accessing data.
  • The majority of people would use it for (non-research / non-educational) work-related purposes and decision making - 3 people picked each of those options.

4. Feedback from respondents that have accessed data before

For respondents that have/had accessed data before, the survey asked which datasets they had accessed, and a number of detailed questions about their experiences related to how they accessed these data, the advantages and disadvantages of this access, the frequency of access, the usage of the data, and respondents’ satisfaction with these data (for their needs).

The following table summarizes the detailed questions per dataset. The numbers represent percentages of respondents, or, in the case of multiple possible answers, percentages of all responses (indicated with an asterisk, ). This table still needs some reorganizing and reordering.*

There was an option “Other”, to which there was one response: LiDAR data. This information will be added to this table.

q_text Information on fish, shellfish or other aquatic organisms Information on terrestrial animals Information on vegetation (salt marsh or uplands) Reserve or trail closures Water level information (tides, Guana lake, river) Water quality information (including nutrients and algae) Weather information
How do you most frequently obtain or access these data?
Download from website (If so, what website?) 35 57 36 56 30 26 75
Other (please specify) 10 14 21 11 30 19 25
Request from a GTMNERR staff member by email 55 29 43 22 40 55 0
Pick-up paper copy in person 0 0 0 11 0 0 0
What are the advantages of this primary method of accessing or obtaining these data?*
Data is received quickly after request 21 0 12 19 16 18 10
Easy/convenient to access 29 40 42 31 41 35 43
Other (please specify) 7 0 0 12 0 2 0
Requesting the data is quick 14 20 12 12 12 18 19
The format the data are delivered / accessed in is useful 26 30 21 12 25 24 19
There are no advantages 2 10 12 12 6 4 10
What are the disadvantages of the primary method of accessing or obtaining these data?*
Difficult/Complicated to access 13 10 12 10 10 8 19
Other (please specify) 17 30 18 30 19 25 25
Slow to receive 4 10 6 0 10 6 12
The format the data are delivered / accessed in is not user-friendly 13 0 18 0 14 11 6
There are no disadvantages 39 20 35 60 38 39 31
Time consuming to request 13 30 12 0 10 11 6
How often do/did you access or obtain these data?
2-3 times a month 20 14 23 0 5 10 8
Daily 5 14 8 14 10 0 8
Less than once a year 15 0 15 0 20 17 0
Once a month 20 43 23 14 20 17 50
Once every 6 months 35 29 8 57 30 28 17
Once every year 5 0 23 14 0 24 8
At least once a week 0 0 0 0 15 3 8
What do you typically use these data for?*
Decision making (for recreational/educational/scientific visits) 9 20 13 27 18 12 17
Educational purposes 24 27 22 27 15 15 17
Monitoring 15 20 13 9 9 17 4
Research 38 13 26 18 33 35 26
Work-related purposes (not research or education) 15 13 17 9 18 17 26
Other (please specify) 0 7 9 9 6 4 9
How well do these data generally satisfy your need(s)?
Extremely well 5 14 0 14 5 3 8
Moderately well 45 43 46 29 55 41 25
Slightly well 15 29 0 0 15 14 25
Very well 35 14 54 57 25 41 42

The websites that respondents used to obtain data were:

“Other” avenues for accessing data were:

Disadvantages listed by respondents under “Other” were:

In terms of usage of data, respondents added the following under “Other”:

5. Dashboard preferences

The survey asked respondents about their preferences regarding dashboard features (type and format of information, data delivery mode) and how they would access the dashboard.

By “dashboard” we meant a user interface on a computer display that presents (up-to-date) information with visualization tools such as graphs, charts, and tables - in a dynamic and interactive way.

6. Characteristics of respondents

Finally, the survey requested demographic information from respondents. This helps the project team get a better understanding of the dashboard’s target audience.

6.1 Age and gender

6.2 Distance from the Guana Estuary

Next steps

The project team will still refine details in this report, and distribute/publish the final version by the end of August 2023. The final report will also include dashboard design recommendations and considerations based on the survey results (and previous workshops).

To access the code that created this document, the survey result data, or jpg versions of the figures, go to https://github.com/GTMNERR-Science-Transfer/Survey-results.

The project team has also started drafting a basic dashboard; we will be in touch soon about further steps on this, and to inform you of upcoming participation and discussion opportunities.

Suggestions and comments on this draft report are very welcome; please email Dr. Geraldine Klarenberg at , or leave an “Issue” on the above linked GitHub repository.

Appendix: Visualizations accompanying section 6

The figures below provide visual interpretations of the table in section 6, on the datasets that respondents have accessed.